
Food Relief Channel – what’s it really for?
Perhaps forty or fifty people came to the W.I. Hall at the end of January
to hear what the Oxford Preservation Trust had to say about the Flood
Relief Channel and how it would affect Hinksey Meadow. Debbie Dance,
the president, was the main speaker, and the general sense of her talk
was that OPT was feeling its way. Of course they don’t want to stand in
the way of the prosperity of the city, but at the same time their job is to
protect our ancient buildings and green spaces.
OPT had not been invited to the original discussion about the scheme,
but now they are part of it, they are making a visible contribution. Thanks
to them, the very rare grassland affected is being shown on all the maps
used in the consultation. Thanks to them, all the trees doomed for the
chop have now been marked with yellow paint. Thanks to them, yellow
posts now mark the rim of the new channel, and they are talking of getting
the actual height of the bridge across the middle of Willow Walk
demonstrated in scaffolding, so we can get a sense of what’s intended.
And make no mistake – it’s big! The bridge will not be a friendly stone one
like the one by the school. It will be more like a motorway span, 4 metres
above ground level, with a long, wide arch of 19 metres, cutting out a
swathe of trees. There will be a second bridge over Monk’s Causeway,
and hardstanding between the two on the city side of the stream for works
vehicles. The scrape itself, of which the 27% belonging to OPT is all in
our parish, will be 60 metres wide, and the ground will be 60 cm lower
than now. And what is it all for?
To “reduce” flood risk to 1200 homes, according to the main Government
website. How? “By lowering parts of the floodplain and working on some
of the existing rivers and streams that run through it, to make more space
for water”. 400,000 tons of earth will be shifted, to be reshaped in banks
near Hinksey Heights Golf Course. It’s hard to see why dredging the silt
from the rivers, untouched for forty years, wouldn’t have the same effect,
much more cheaply.
The agencies involved hope that the final effect will be unobtrusive and
enhance the potential for wildlife in the area, but they don’t seem to have
thought it through. The landowners are up in arms because no fences will
be allowed. But of course without fences you can’t have grazing (from
which they get their income). And without grazing, the land reverts to
scrub unless it’s regularly mown. There is a maintenance budget, but only
for the first ten years, after which it will be left to fend for itself.